|
KELIIPIO:I think you should deny the request of the applicant. Im wondering why
<br />he cant downsize his house to move his pool back and fit his pool within, within the required
<br />setback. And I think that his lawyer has made some, I mean, all kinds of excuses with the public
<br />right-of-way for reasons why you should grant it; and I really think those are poor excuses, and
<br />you shouldnt grant this-this request. Thank you.
<br />SPRINGER:Youre welcome. Thank you. Commissioners, do you have any questions
<br />for the testifier? Commissioner Siracusa.
<br />SIRACUSA:Yes. Id like you to be a little more specific and tell us why you think
<br />those excuses are poor.
<br />KELIIPIO:Well, the excuses that he, he mentioned were that the lot owner already
<br />has provided like 5 feet of public access to the trail and, and, and the front part, that wall is also
<br />publicaccess,andthereforeheshould,youknow,since,sincethatparthepaystaxesonthat
<br />section that therefore he should have the pool where it is. And, and Im, Im thinking that
<br />perhaps, you know, the County needs to or somebody needs to condemn that area for public use
<br />exclusively so that we dont have those kinds of excuses any more for this landowner or people
<br />like him to make. And that, I dont know, those reasons are not good enough, in my opinion, for
<br />him to have his pool so close to the shoreline setback.
<br />SPRINGER:Commissioner Siracusa.
<br />SIRACUSA:Are, are you interpreting this as a native Hawaiian access rights issue? I, I
<br />notice from your name and your appearance that youre probably native Hawaiian. But you
<br />didnt say so specifically and Id like to know if thats the way youre interpreting this.
<br />KELIIPIO:No, Im not, just as citizen in Kona.
<br />SPRINGER:Thank you. Other Commissioners? Thank you, Ms. Keliipio.
<br />Mr. Rothstein, your name and address, please.
<br />ROTHSTEIN:Good morning, my name is Jerry Rothstein; and I live in 76-123 Royal
<br />Poinciana Drive, Kailua-Kona. And Im here representing PASH, Public Access Shoreline
<br />Hawai¡i. There are two givens here. One is a Shoreline Certification and the second, which
<br />establishes the shoreline at the base of the wall, and the second is the shoreline certification rules,
<br />which allow a shoreline setback variance based upon certain criteria which are defined as
<br />hardship. There are other things that have been brought up that I maintain are not relevant. Prior
<br />shoreline certification is not relevant to this. The fact that neighbors have pools is not relative,
<br />relevant to this. All but one of those pools have been put in without having to deal with a
<br />shoreline setback. The fact that theres a makai, 3-foot makai easement along the wall is not
<br />relevant. And, also, the prior shoreline setback variance on parcel 42, which was just brought
<br />up, I dont think is relevant either. That was another time, that was 7 years ago. That, no, it was
<br />a, it was a almost 10 years ago. It was a different Planning Commission, a different Mayor, a
<br />different Planning Director; and theres not necessarily any precedent value. If they did
<br />something one way, it is no bearing on what, on the decisions that you have to make today.
<br />10
<br />
<br />
|